Blue Jell-O and Whipped Cream

"The sky is blue. It also has white areas."

Therefore, I can safely say that the sky is made of blue Jell-O, and also has whipped cream on it.

Now, I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. You are not allowed to use any outside information. The only information you can use is the above quoted statement.

The above quoted statement is completely accurate. It is not misleading in any way, nor is it ambiguous. It is 100% true.

Simply put, you can not prove me wrong with just that information. It's impossible. However, you can propose an alternate interpretation.

For example, you could propose "The sky is therefore made of blueberry ice cream swirled with vanilla ice cream."

And this would also be 100% accurate, given only the above quotation. However, now we come to a conflict, as the sky can not be made of "blue Jell-O and whipped cream" if it is made of "blueberry ice cream swirled with vanilla ice cream".

Let us examine something more relevant to Vatican II and Sedevacantists, or any who oppose Vatican II for that matter.

The Sedevacantist will provide...

Second Council of Constantinople, can. 10, 553 AD: “If anyone does not
confess his belief that our lord Jesus Christ, who was crucified in his
human flesh, is truly God and the Lord of glory and one of the members
of the holy Trinity: let him be anathema (cursed).”

Now, let us examine this statement, as a Sedevacantist would...

Jews, as a whole, do not accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God, or as God. Therefore, Jews, as a whole, are accursed.

Can I prove this statement wrong? No. Given what he has provided, he is
100% accurate, and his statement can not be refuted. Much like my
statement above, where one can not refute my reasoning on the sky, given
the provided info.

I could provide an alternate interpretation though.

All mankind who believes Jesus Christ is truly God, but never is given opportunity to confess the following statement "our lord Jesus Christ, who was crucified in his human flesh, is truly God and the Lord of glory and one of the members of the holy Trinity", let them be anathema.

Or...

Children to young to understand who do not confess "our lord Jesus Christ, who was crucified in his human flesh, is truly God and the Lord of glory and one of the members of the holy Trinity" are cursed.

All statements can be seen as accurate, given what we have been provided.

How do we settle disputes? I could say that, though the above statement provided by the sedevacantist is possibly correct, my statement is what was actually meant by the council. Clearly, more information from a valid source is needed to determine who is on the right track.

Intelligent interpretation requires many things. First off, it requires
careful examination. Secondly, it requires sufficient information. We
also need to be prepared to accept our reasoning was incorrect when
shown that we have not fully examined, nor accepted valid information.

Careful examination consists of several things. First, is the source
reliable? The information you are examining, is it accurate? Is it
complete? Does it contain subtle changes or special formatting to lead
you to believe something other than what is said? Does it paraphrase?
Does it insert inaccurate interpretation?

If possible, read the information in it's original context. Find an
approved source, and than, double check the source, which is approved,
is accurate. In this case, one can not be too thorough.

Sufficient information. Perhaps the most difficult part. You can never
have too much information, however, for each piece of information, you
need, again, careful examination. Therefore, the more information you
gather, the more examination required, the more time consumed. For
people truly diligent and interested, this usually raises no issue.

Willing to change. No one is impartial, it is an impossibility. We all
have our biases, and we will, depending on the circumstances, view our
information and interpret things in favor of our bias. The best we can
do is keep an open mind as much as possible, with a willingness to
adjust our opinion if we feel we can not adequately respond or address
information provided, or a dedication to continue our research and
obtain the knowledge so we can adequately respond.

Ultimately, it is impossible to completely refute or 'prove' anything.
Jesus Christ did not prove, beyond a doubt, to certain people he was the
Son of God. I believe he is, there is enough proof for me, but those who
do not are a perfect example of people who have not gathered
information, carefully examined and thrown aside their personal bias.

And it follows, one can not completely refute a sedevacantist. It is an
impossibility, just as one can not completely refute a novus ordite.
Each side has a valid information, has carefully examined, and, I
believe, been willing to change (though this would a personal choice,
and I can attest to myself, but not others). The only factor left to
decide is a valid authority, and according to one side, it does not
exist, and the other side, it is the Vicar of Christ.

“Reason and faith cannot be separated without diminishing the capacity
of men and women to know themselves, the world and God in an appropriate
way.” - Pope John Paul II

Let us not abandon our faith in the Lord to maintain his Church because
our reason says it must be so. We should fully examine everything, and
not just that which we see.

I may say that "I hate Pancakes", which is true, but it is also true
that "I love Pancakes with Maple Syrup.

“Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to
the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a
desire to know the truth - in a word, to know himself - so that, by
knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of
truth about themselves.” - Pope John Paul II